In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
Good thing I didn't ask *you* for anything. My proposal affected you in no way, shape or form.
Quoted message said:
To my way of thinking, you used a semantic nit-pick to avoid dealing with the real point of my post.
That's because you put a meaning into my post that did not exist. You never waste an opportunity to break your elbow patting yourself on the back for all your perceived fine qualities, but you see the worst in what others say.
The matter was settled before you said a word. If you read the thread before posting your usual mean-spirited comment you'd have known that.
Rather than deal with the substance of my post (which you could have done very easily if you weren't so defensive), you ignore it, resort to semantic nit-picking to justify yourself, and finally stoop to personal attacks on me.
I thought you were one of the "good guys" on this group. Are you trying to change my opinion?
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 14:02:51 -0500, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
dejablues said:
Spammers post via googlegroups, but they use something else in their email addy, like yahoo, aol ,hotmail, or something they make up. There are ways of killing domains, I looked into it briefly but don't have the time to fiddle with it now.
Finally - somebody I can relate to ;-)
nfilter/NewsProxy is an add-on that would work for OE, but it's really only for techies, not for the casual OE user.
-sw
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 23:58:25 GMT, "deja.blues" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 14:59:53 GMT, "dejablues" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"Nancy Young" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... >I killfiled the gmail domain, life is certainly more pleasant > without all that spam and other assorted [censored]. Unfortunately, > I see that I am missing too many people I don't want to miss, > so I deleted the rule.
It isn't gmail that's the problem, it's posts coming from Google Groups, whose users may or may not use [email hidden] as their addy. So, how does one killfile all posts from Google Groups, and leave those posting with a gmail address through Outlook Express or another real newsreader?
who told you o.e. was a real newsreader?
your pal, blake
Ok, maybe not a *real* newsreader to some, but a stand-alone program as opposed to web-based methods of accessing Usenet. I know there are OE haters out there. :-P I've tried Agent, Xnews, Thunderbird, 40tude, Pan, and Pine, and I keep going back to OE. It does what I want about 90% of the time. I stand by the fact that Gmail is not the problem - it's Google Groups. Some newsservers do not allow munged email addys anyway .
possibly my mistake, then. i thought outlook express *was* browser-based. perhaps i'm confusing it with internet explorer. apologies.
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But then again, if you thought OE was a browser-based mail and news client, then maybe I'm underestimating casual users ;-)
The message <[email hidden]> from Sqwertz <[email hidden]> contains these words:
Quoted message said:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:58:49 GMT, blake murphy wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
Quoted message said:
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But a good newsreader will organise all that for the user. Usenet posters don't come any less-techie than me. I haven't a clue how or why anything works but I can read and follow very simple instructions which say things like "click on the box marked options. Now click the options you want to select".
The main problem I see, is people who don't RTFM, so they haven't a clue what automated services are sitting there just waiting for nothing more techie than a click of the mouse button.
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
The message <[email hidden]> from Sqwertz <[email hidden]> contains these words:
Quoted message said:
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:58:49 GMT, blake murphy wrote:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
Quoted message said:
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But a good newsreader will organise all that for the user.
But the whole point of this subthread was using nfilter/NewsProxy for OE users (or those with even worse newsreaders). nfilter provides filtering features that OE doesn't.
They may own it, but they're not using it. That URL returns a "Server not found" message. Test e-mails get "Host or domain name not found. Name service error for name=geemail.com type=A: Host found but no data record of requested type". So I don't think I'm going to bother anyone. However, just in case, I changed it one last time. I'm nice like that...
Glad you checked. Never know when someone could take that address.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 14:19:57 -0500, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
I can't even tell what your real email address is from your postings. I think it used to be in there, but I don't see it now.
That's the clue, steve.... you have to DIG to find it. Bots don't do that, people do.
And the whole point of my post is that a bot can, and will guess it. It's true. Nobody went out their way to manually dig out your personal email address to add it to their spam lists. It's all automated.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 14:19:57 -0500, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
I can't even tell what your real email address is from your postings. I think it used to be in there, but I don't see it now.
That's the clue, steve.... you have to DIG to find it. Bots don't do that, people do.
Oh - SHeeit. You have it in the headers of your email.
Duh. And you expect a bots *not* to find that?!? Even if you have another one besides that, the bots will likely guess it. Any email administrator will tell you that.
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 23:41:33 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
sf said:
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 14:19:57 -0500, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
I can't even tell what your real email address is from your postings. I think it used to be in there, but I don't see it now.
That's the clue, steve.... you have to DIG to find it. Bots don't do that, people do.
Oh - SHeeit. You have it in the headers of your email.
Duh. And you expect a bots *not* to find that?!? Even if you have another one besides that, the bots will likely guess it. Any email administrator will tell you that.
I know it's in my headers, which you have to display to see (meaning open the message first). I thought bots just harvest what's shown in the TOC.
I know it's in my headers, which you have to display to see (meaning open the message first). I thought bots just harvest what's shown in the TOC.
Nope. Like I said - email bots use every word that exists on the internet. That includes your reply-to address. The cheap bots of 3-5 years ago used to only scan the From: header, but nowdays everybody mungs them. And there have been quite a few advances in email address harvesting.
There are hundreds of thousands of computers searching day and night for signs of extraterrestrial life on other planets. Email address harvesting is much more profitable so you can pretty much figure more computers are working on that than UFO's.
You're probably get even more spam that what you're seeing, just that gmail is filtering it out.
"Little Malice" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > One time on Usenet, "MJB" <[email hidden]> said: >> "Omelet" <omp_omelet@g_mail.com> wrote in message >> news:[email hidden]... > >> > Steve, I did not mind changing my munging a bit because the odds >> > are, she is not the only one doing this. > >> She isn't > > I changed mine. I hope it helps...
It's working. First time I've seen your posts on this server.
Well heck, I had no idea! I wondered why it seemed like I was being ignored more than usual. ;-)
Thanks for the report back...
I enjoy your posts,
Thank you!
Quoted message said:
and slogging through Google to read them is a *real* chore anymore. So, another "thank you"...
:-)
I knew you had sweet heart in there somewhere, Greg... ;-)
